[OrangeMonkey]

I would assume, perhaps rightly perhaps wrongly, that in your example Texas does not have jurisdiction and would be a third party to that action. The state government could act against an individual for something they did in their state, or the federal government could conceivably act, but not other uninvolved states.

In both of your examples, the states are controlling the behavior of people in those states. Texas is controlling people in its state (and leaving). South Carolina would be banning things brought into its state (information). I think both of these examples, if they are as plainly stated as you mentioned, are illegal for different reasons (interstate commerce clause) but I wouldn't think this is an example of states policing actions that happened in other states.